Slashdot Mirror

http://www.themoneymasters.com/

After viewing that film a few years back, I couldn't help thinking how Bill Still's otherwise interesting ideas and viewpoints were, very sadly, polluted by poor fact checking.

Specifically, entire segments of the movie, for instance most of what he says of the Rothchilds and entire chunks of the history he depicts of 19th century banking, are based on a revisionist version of history promulgated by nazi propaganda, which itself can be traced to pre-nazi aryan/atlantist theorists such as Blavatsky. These "truths" eventually entered common lore by repetition, and found their way into the 21st century.

Anyway, while no specialist in these topics myself, I knew enough for it to raise red flags. And I spent most of the movie wondering where he sourced his information.

In the end, it removed little from the key takeaways, since most were grounded in economic ideas which were either convincing or interesting, but it did not help him drive the point home.

"The US doesn't even need to fund deficit spending through debt either, as a government in sovereign control over its own currency, is capable of funding itself through money creation, with the only limit being the potential for inflation."

This is where you prove yourself to be a babe, lost in the woods.

The United States of America does not have control of it's own currency. The poorly and misleadingly named "Federal Reserve" has control over the currency that we BORROW from them. The Federal Reserve is a private bank, controlled by the heirs of the Rothschild family. The Federal Reserve is the same thing that many other countries call a "Central Bank". All those so-called central banks belong to the same people.

The banks do not exist for the benefit of the nations that host them. The banks do not exist for the benefit of citizens. The banks exist for one purpose, and one purpose only. That purpose is PROFIT.

When it profits those banks to do so, they will trigger a recession. When it profits them to do so, they end recessions, as well as depressions. The very same central banks will fund both sides of a war. The Central Bank of England funded Napoleon, at the same time that they also funded the armies that eventually beat him.

http://www.themoneymasters.com/

I'm under no delusion that the current Federal Reserve is the ultimate solution, but it seems to work better than it's predesessors.

It's time for you to take the red pill.
http://www.themoneymasters.com/mm/

The problem with gold as a currency base is that it's too easy to monopolize. Even silver is susceptible... back in the 70's there was a pair of investor brothers (can't remember their names off hand) who caused a bit of havoc in that market. The best option IMO is a fiat currency which is pegged (by statute) according to population growth.

http://www.themoneymasters.com/monetary-reform-act/

Ok, I didn't realize I was talking to a tinfoil hat-type. If I'm mistaken in my assessment of you, then I apologize, but you should be aware that you can't just make stuff up to win arguments.

Sadly, I didn't make anything up. I wish I were. My information is derived from several sources, starting with the federal reserve's website FAQ., and moving through the Federal Reserve Act itself. (That's a copy of the original document signed into law in 1913. It has undergone some changes since then, but the essential aspects of it remain intact). The Federal Reserve annual reports also provide the figures necessary to do the math.

Basic analysis of these and similar materials provides everything necessary for a logical interpretation of the system at work. There are a number of detailed explorations of the subject matter available performed by various parties, which while sometimes over-zealous in presentation are nonetheless based on useful assessments. Here's one such example.

Now, I concede that I was being abrupt and very general in my assertions. It is a rather complicated system, but I will try to explain some of the details as I understand them. . .

The Fed itself is owned by member banks which hold stock in the Federal Reserve corporation. 6% interest by law is paid on the par value of those stocks. It doesn't add up to very much; in 1999, the amount held in stock value was around 6.4 billion dollars, six percent of which was around 380 million dollars paid in interest to member banks. The rest of the year's profits made by the Fed through interest bearing lending was around 25 billion, the bulk of which was paid by law to the US Treasury. --All of which is mostly well and good and only a little weird around the edges.

But that's just the surface. The part where things get crazy is tied up with fractional banking, which while you probably know something about, I will recap in order to explain my previous statements which you found to be tin-foil-hatty. . .

A bank, upon borrowing money from the Federal Reserve, is allowed to then lend against that money. Through this system, a basic bank is allowed to lend out 10 dollars for every 1 actual dollar held in its coffer. --I'm not sure what the actual figure is today, but 10% has historically been the base fractional amount a bank is allowed to lend against. Thus, for example, upon borrowing 1 billion dollars from the Fed, a bank can then turn that into 10 billion dollars instantly simply by lending it out, effectively creating 9 billion dollars out of thin air. --The public, of course, must pay that back with interest, creating even more than 10 billion. But that's just the start; the money once repaid by the public can then be re-lent against 10% of itself, creating a geometric growth. The initial 1 billion dollars balloons into a huge amount. This is how fractional banking works.

So when you say that the banks are not allowed to print money, you are technically correct; They can't print physical dollar bills. However, they are allowed to create money out of nothing. --A rather stupendous amount of it. And where does that money (and the interest due at payback time) come from? Well, it doesn't come from anywhere. It exists entirely in the form of public debt, which people and businesses must somehow scrounge around in the existing economy to pay back. And how do they do this? --Well, by engaging in business and work, being paid with more of the from-thin-air dollars which were also loaned out by the banks to other businesses and employers. Because there is by default always more debt owed due to interest than there is money, the cycle must begin again with more loans.

The US Treasury does at the end of the ye

SOX is a bit player in a giant swindle. The jobs problem has nothing to do with the lack of venture capital. The problem is the economy is up to its eyeballs in debt, and there's no money to pay the interest due.

This is due to the debt-based nature of our financial system. See Money and the Crisis of Civilization and I Want the Earth plus 5%.

If the congress wanted to create jobs, it would issue interest-free money (such as Abraham Lincoln's United States Notes) and spend it directly into circulation on worthwhile projects. The most worthwhile project today is renewable energy technology. Wind farms are probably the best candidate, with hydrocarbon synthesizers to use all the power generated.

R&D on cold fusion and other paradigm-busting energy technology should get some money too - a Japanese researcher held a demonstration of his Cold Fusion setup in May.

Fixing the banking system is a good first step for restoring rosperity.

neither parties did what you say.
the british however, managed to start this civil war by boycotting american cotton.
see http://www.themoneymasters.com/synopsis.htm

Watch the documentary "The Money Masters". It's available on Google video, I think you'd be very interested in it. You can also buy the DVDs here:
http://www.themoneymasters.com/

Interesting. What with their propaganda-styled approach, I just assumed The Corporation was making it up.

Note to people who make films like The Corporation, End of Suburbia or The Money Masters: When you go overboard with your conspiracy theories, you lend discredit to everything you present!